THE MESSIAH’S KINGDOM AND THE KINGDOM OF GOD
Jesus’s arrest was the second in a series of pivotal events that led directly to His death. Many Jewish leaders wanted Him dead and many Jewish supporters loved Him, and at least one, Peter, fought and was willing to die for Him. Pointedly, Jesus told Peter to stop fighting.
Jesus’s arrest was the second in a series of pivotal events that led directly to His death. Many Jewish leaders wanted Him dead and many Jewish supporters loved Him, and at least one, Peter, fought and was willing to die for Him. Pointedly, Jesus told Peter to stop fighting.
A short time later Jesus stated:
“My
kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My
servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the
Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm.” Therefore Pilate
said to Him, “So You are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say correctly
that I am a king. (John 18:36).
Jesus did not intend to set up a physical kingdom. Not only was it not one of his goals, He resisted the effort to do so. In contrast to this, Jesus taught previously that He, as the Messiah, the Son of God, would return as the King and Judge and purge evil people from His kingdom. (Matthew 13:40-43, 25:31-46, 26:63, 64, also ref. Daniel 7:13, 14, 27). But for now the Messiah’s kingdom was going to have to wait. One day it would be established, but not today, not during His life.
There was another kingdom Jesus taught about: the
“kingdom of God.” A comparison of His teachings on His future kingdom
with His teachings on the “kingdom of God” shows that more emphasis was
placed on the “kingdom of God” theme. This theme was prominent in His
teaching, parables, and sermons. The kingdom of God was present on
earth, it existed in the here and now, and would be established in a
fuller measure when He returned as the Word of God, the King of Kings
and Lord of Lords. This significant theme was one of the primary topics
He taught following His resurrection (Acts 1:3).
Note however, even after His resurrection His
disciples wanted and expected an established physical kingdom (Acts
1:7). This kingdom would at the very least supplant Roman rule. These
disciples wanted earnestly to establish God’s rule on earth. They rued
Rome’s rule over and oppression of their country. But they were
answered “not now” and that that time was in the Father’s hands. Then
they were instructed on their lives’ mission and purpose. From then on
the physical kingdom of God on earth was not their goal or their vision.
Jesus instructed His disciples extensively about the
kingdom of God because He desired that it be established and fulfilled
in their lives. Until He returned it was to be a spiritual kingdom, a
spiritual power. It is righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit
(Romans 14:17); it is where God is King. God, through the Holy Spirit,
was to rule as King in their hearts, souls, strengths, and minds.
As God ruled in people’s hearts and minds they
changed. Jesus’s two great commands were to love God and love your
neighbor. Men and women who became Christians were commanded to excel
at this. Those who became Christians turned from sin and hate towards
loving God and man. Their hearts and minds changed as they loved and
obeyed Christ. This submission to God was powerful enough to cause them
to not only live for Him; it motivated them to suffer and die for Him.
During the next few centuries Christianity was
persecuted harshly but it spread throughout the Roman Empire. The
kingdom of God was established in the hearts and minds of the early
church and their faith and love won an empire. No claim of moral
perfection is made here, rather the changing of hearts and minds, and
lives, under the kingdom of God’s rule is demonstrated. This victory
was won without the use of the sword, without threat, without coercion,
without promise of material gain. Force was not used to make people
believe in Christ as the Messiah, the Son of God, and Lord. No bigoted
forms of taxation, social humiliation, or discrimination were imposed to
provoke people to become Christians. Under severe persecution
Christianity continued to spread far and wide.
Why didn’t Jesus instruct His followers to establish
a physical kingdom on earth? They were willing to pick up swords.
Perhaps they could establish it for the Messiah’s rule? Imagine a true
Christian kingdom, a sanctified country, whose citizens excelled at
loving God and loving their neighbor. This kingdom of God on earth would
be a geo-political kingdom, a cultural and social kingdom, a martial
kingdom. There the church could establish, and if need be, enforce
their beliefs and rules on non-Christians.
Why didn’t Jesus instruct His disciples to establish a theocracy or an ecclesiocracy?
“What could go wrong?”
Perhaps something like these monks fighting each other at the Church of the Nativity? Fighting Monks
How shameful. How embarrassing. What a brilliant crimson stain upon Christianity. Atheists, Muslims, and others rightly use these public actions to criticize Christianity. Christianity’s birthplace was in Jerusalem but these men are not practicing the Christianity Jesus and His disciples practiced. They certainly do not represent a root of Christianity; their fruit is carnal.
Yes, “What could go wrong?”
MUHAMMAD’S KINGDOM & THE CALIPHATE
Muhammad’s ministry lasted for 23 years, from 610 to
his death from poisoning in 633. During that time, with the exception
of his colossal Satanic Verses error, he proclaimed and practiced Islam
faithfully. Those 23 years were divided between two cities: 13 years in
Mecca and 10 years in Medina.
Muhammad’s ministry in Mecca was primarily a
spiritual one. In several aspects it paralleled Jesus’s ministry. At
this time he did not seek to establish a physical kingdom of Allah. (I
know that Allah means God and Arab Christians use it. Here I am using
Allah to signify Islam’s God). Allah had told Muhammad that he was not
to force men to become Muslims:
“And
if your Lord had enforced His Will, surely, all who are in the earth
would have believed together. Will you then force men to become
believers?” Quran 10:99
Muhammad had little success in Mecca. His few followers were weak and oppressed. Any use of force against the Quraysh, the dominant tribe in Mecca, would result in their deaths.
However a few years before he left Mecca he gained
new converts in Medina. These followers preached Islam and gained many
converts there. Soon Muhammad had a sizeable body of Muslims in Medina.
Many were men of war and at the Second Pledge of Aqabah they pledged
their swords in Muhammad’s defense.
Throughout his ministry, as Muhammad’s circumstances
changed Allah’s revelations changed, and Islam changed. And these
fighting men represented a significant change! Unlike his followers in
Mecca the Medina Muslims were not weak or oppressed. They were armed
and knew how to fight. On cue, shortly before he left Mecca and fled to
Medina, Allah gave Muhammad a new revelation, the “Order to Fight.”
Ibn Ishaq states:
The apostle had not been given permission to fight
or allowed to shed blood before the second Aqaba. He had simply been
ordered to call men to God and to endure insult and forgive the
ignorant….
…He gave permission to His apostle to fight and to protect himself against those who wronged them and treated them badly.1
The “Order to Fight” is described on pages 212 and 213. Different Islamic scholars have differing opinions as to which verses exactly comprise this revelation (most all of the various verses are similar), but here the general text is stated as 22:39-41 and 2:193. Below are two of the four verses
Permission to fight is given to those (i.e. believers against disbelievers), who are fighting them, ... 22:39
Fight against them until idolatry is no more and
God’s religion reigns supreme. But if they desist, fight none except
the evil-doers. 2:193
The order to fight allowed both defensive and offensive fighting, (offensive to end idolatry and spiritual rebellion). Many of the non-violent verses in the Quran were now "abrogated" or canceled.
Muhammad summed up Allah’s directive:
It
has been narrated on the authority of Abdullah b. 'Umar that the
Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people
till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the
messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat and if they
do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf
except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.2
I want to emphasize this: If you want to understand the violence in the Islamic would today you must start here. Muhammad’s statement above is a foundation, a “Maxwell’s Equation,” for understanding the role violence plays in Islam.
Muhammad intended to set up a kingdom of Allah.
People would have to testify that Muhammad was Allah’s Messenger and
they would have to obey various aspects of Islamic law. This was not
optional. People had to either submit to Islam or fight the Muslims.
Muhammad, and implicitly his followers, were ordered to fight
non-Muslims until they either converted or submitted to Islam’s rule (as
Christians and Jews had to pay extortion and submit in humility per
9:29).
Muhammad establishes Allah’s kingdom on earth.
Muhammad heeded this new direction from Allah and
put it into effect quickly. He obeyed Allah and fought non-Muslims
until they bent the knee to him. He established Allah’s kingdom on
earth. How did he accomplish this?
Shortly after arriving in Medina Muhammad began to
send out his soldiers to raid and pillage non-Muslim villages and trade
caravans. Naturally this led to them murdering non-Muslims. Muhammad’s
thefts and murders led to war. Tabari records:
This
incident had provoked (a state of) war between the Messenger of God and
Quraysh and was the beginning of the fighting in which they inflicted
casualties upon one another...3
Tabari
notes that it was Muhammad, not the Quraysh, that started the war.
During the next ten years the breath, width, and depth of violence
increased. Below is a general progression of Muhammad’s efforts to obey
Allah and spread Islam’s domain through the use of force, or threat of
force, primarily:
1) raids on non-Muslim villages and caravans
2) murders and assassinations throughout the Hijaz
3) targeted religious persecutions of several Jewish tribes within and without Medina
4) military conquests, subjection, rapes, massacres, and total destruction of non-Muslim Arab tribes
5) military campaigns to spread Islam’s domination far and wide.
Muhammad did not win all of his battles but he won most of them. People feared Muhammad and the Muslims. Muhammad’s military leaders proclaimed: “Accept Islam and you will be safe.” People understood that if they did not accept Islam then they were fair game to be attacked, plundered, tortured, enslaved, raped, and murdered. Consequently many Arab tribes used the “if you can’t beat em, join em” approach to becoming Muslim. They didn’t want to be plundered, have their wives stolen, enslaved and raped, they didn’t want their children made into slaves, they didn’t want to die. Why not join Islam then? And all of this occurred under Muhammad’s direction and approving eye.
You can find all of this here: Articles on Terrorism and Violence
Key articles are:
Muhammad's Excessive Cruelty
Jihad
Jihad: Islamic Teaching from its primary sources
The trail of oppression and blood behind Muhammad grew ever wide. Muhammad took Allah’s command seriously and labored to fulfill that command: he spread and established his Islam, the kingdom of Allah. While he lived no one dared disobey him. He ruled Allah’s kingdom firmly, continued to obey Allah, and fight men until Islam ruled over them. He and his followers engaged in jihad, holy warfare, to spread his kingdom’s domain. (Jihad means struggle or effort, but its theological definition is “holy warfare” see this article, section 4: The Verse of the Sword: Sura 9:5 and Jihad )
He died about a year and a half after his conquest
of Mecca. He was an eminently successful man: he had wealth, power,
fame, respect, sex with many beautiful women, both wives and slave
concubines. He had overcome incredible challenges and eventually
subjected or crushed his enemies. Muhammad died at the apex of his
power and he established Allah’s kingdom on the bodies of those who
opposed or rejected his claim of prophethood.
But what happened after Muhammad died? We’ll take a
look at the kingdom of Allah in action. What was its power? What were
its effects?
An examination of the Caliphate, the continuing “Kingdom of Allah.”
Muhammad left behind him a body of men that knew
him, loved him, and obeyed him. They would fight, kill, and die for him
because they believed him to be a true prophet. They had memorized his
Quran, they recorded anecdotes about his life and teachings (hadith),
and they imitated his lifestyle (sunnah) earnestly. There was no
shortage of knowledge about Muhammad’s example and his commands to love
one another as brothers. The men that led the Muslims after his death
were not a pack of novices; they knew him and his will intimately.
ABU BAKR
Immediately following Muhammad’s death the Muslims
began to quarrel amongst themselves over who would be their leader. The
original Muslims from Mecca, (the Muhajirun, “immigrants”), wanted one
of their own to assume command as Caliph, while the Medina Muslims, (the
Ansar, “helpers”), wanted one of their own, Sa’d bin ‘Ubadah, to be the
leader. An ugly argument broke out and each side cursed and threatened
to kill the other. Punches were thrown, and swords drawn but not
used. Umar proclaimed that Abu Bakr should be the leader and demanded
that everyone give him the oath of allegiance willingly or unwillingly.
Finally the Ansar agreed to have Abu Bakr as ruler.
Quite an inauspicious start for them wasn’t it? So
much for the Muslim brotherhood that Muhammad taught and commanded. Not
much to be proud of. This start was a portent of things to come.
Also following Muhammad’s death many tribes that had
been subjected, coerced, or forced into becoming Muslims under
compulsion, “willingly or unwillingly”, left Islam to one degree or
another. Many were not at war with the Muslims. They wanted to live in
peace and freedom instead of being forced to be Muslims. However,
under Islam they were viewed as apostates and Muhammad commanded the
killing of apostates. Consequently these tribes that refused to walk to
Abu Bakr’s Islamic talk were attacked, re-subjected, or slaughtered.
Tens of thousands were killed by Abu Bakr’s Islamic army. These wars
are known as the wars of apostasy, (Ridda Wars). Tabari volume 10
describes these brutal, imperial, wars in detail.
Some people doubt that the Muslims used compulsion
and forced people to submit to Islam. But that use of force is
documented clearly:
“You
[Muslims] were the most severe people against his enemies who were among
you, and the most troublesome to his enemies who were not from among
you, so that the Arabs became upright in God’s cause, willingly or
unwillingly, and the distant one submitted in abject humiliation until
through you God made great slaughter in the earth for His Apostle, and
by your swords the Arabs were abased for him.”4
Muslims quote 2:256 as saying that there is no compulsion in religion but that verse was spoken for a specific time and a specific situation and it was definitely not a universal command with universal application.
Abu Bakr continued Muhammad’s methods of war and
oppression to establish Allah’s kingdom and compel or force people to
submit to Islam.
That of course was an external trait of Allah’s
kingdom – conquering all that is non-Islamic. But what about affairs of
the heart? How was Allah’s kingdom internalized? How did it compare
to Jesus’s “kingdom of God?”
The answer to his is best displayed in how
Muhammad’s closest followers behaved and acted towards each other. The
early Christians were generally humble and devoted to each other and
they served each other. How about Muhammad’s family? There we should
expect to see the fullest measure of Allah’s kingdom in their lives and
hearts.
But you would be surprised to see what actually
happened. Family and friends turned upon each other. Betrayals,
murders, assassinations, lust for power, greed, etc. all were prominent
in the lives of Muhammad’s closest family and friends.
For example, Muhammad had amassed a sizeable amount
of wealth prior to his death. Before his death Muhammad established
that a large portion of it be used in support of the Muslim community
and that his wives be provided for but he also ordered that his
descendants were not to inherit any of the wealth because he believed
that is what the Jewish prophets of old had done (he was wrong in this
belief). Consequently, upon becoming Caliph, Abu Bakr refused to
distribute any of the wealth to Muhammad descendants.
This led to deep rooted strife and bickering.
Muhammad’s daughter, Fatimah, her husband Ali, and her relative
al-Abbas, bickered with Abu Bakr and demanded the wealth. He refused to
give them a nickel. As a result Fatimah and the other hated him
deeply. Fatimah died six months after Muhammad. Ali’s hate was such
that he did not even tell Abu Bakr about her death nor allow him to
attend her burial.5
You can see from this episode that these people had
not been transformed from their carnal selves. Muhammad’s kingdom had
changed their outsides, they grew wealthy and powerful, but their hearts
were unregenerate and sinful.
Abu Bakr was Caliph up to his death about a year and
a half later. He was Muhammad’s best friend and knew him best.
Certainly Abu Bakr did what Muhammad expected him to do. Abu Bakr shed a
river of blood to spread and maintain Allah’s kingdom, Islam.
UMAR
Abu Bakr was wise enough to preclude the violence
and stress of a leader’s unexpected death and he decreed that Umar, (who
was previously Muhammad’s second closest friend), would succeed him as
Caliph. Umar sent his armies out to conquer non-Muslim lands and they
conquered Syria, Palestine, Iraq, Persia, and Egypt. (Persia suffered
especially under the Arab’s oppression). These were conquests by the
sword. Wars and battles were fought but over time the Muslims
conquered. Islam was certainly not then a religion of peace, it was
instead a religion of power, force, and brutality. Tens of thousands
were killed and hundreds of thousands were subjected by force to Islam’s
rule. Those that converted to Islam were treated much better than the
non-Muslims, and through this oppressive bigotry Islam coerced people to
convert.
UTHMAN
Uthman assumed leadership after Umar died. Uthman’s
claim to fame is that he issued the official recension of the Quran we
have today. There were many different Qurans in existence. They were
mostly similar but also had notable differences. These differences
caused severe divisions amongst the Muslims. Uthman fixed this by
having an official version of the Quran made and ordered other competing
Qurans to be burned.
Uthman’s armies conquered much of Armenia, pushed
further NW into Asia, and subjected Cyprus. During his reign the
Muslims had become very powerful and wealthy.
I believe that in Uthman’s death we see Islam’s
truest fruit. Political corruption set in and many Muslims became
disgruntled and upset with Uthman. Eventually large groups of these
disgruntled Muslims from several Muslim regions went to Medina to
confront Uthman. One of these groups was from Egypt and they wanted Ali
to assume the Caliphate.
Ali, Muhammad’s son in law, was responsible to
protect the aged Uthman. Initially he did post guards and fulfilled his
responsibility.
However, deep down Ali seethed with bitterness and
resentment because he felt that he should have been made successor to
Muhammad. Instead he bit his tongue as one by one, Abu Bakr, Umar, and
then Uthman, assumed the role. His bitterness rooted itself ever deeper
in his heart while he coveted the wealth, status, and power of being
Caliph.
The confrontation between the disgruntled Muslim
gangs and Uthman took a turn for the worse. It was at this point Ali
withdrew his family and guards responsible for protecting Uthman.
Uthman was then attacked and murdered. Ali’s men were nowhere to be
found.
It’s important to note that one of the assailants was Abu Bakr’s son, Muhammad b. Abi Bakr. Here is Tabari’s account:
Muhammad
b. Abi Bakr, came with thirteen men and went up to Uthman. He seized
his beard and shook it until I heard his teeth chattering. Muhammad b.
Abi Bakr said, “Muawiyah was no help to you, nor was Ibn Amir, nor your
letters.” Uthman said, “Let go of my beard, son of my brother! Let go
of my beard!” Then I saw Ibn Abi Bakr signaling with his eye to one of
the rebels. He came over to him with a broad iron headed arrow and
stabbed him in the head with it…. They gathered round him and killed
him.”6
Conversely, imagine this: Jesus’s apostles hating, fighting with, and murdering each other. Imagine Peter’s son murdering Thomas. It would be quite horrible; it would be a dark and evil situation.
The story actually gets worse, darker, and more
evil. After Uthman’s death there was an outcry to punish the
murderers. With the support of the Egyptian gang Ali assumed the
Caliphate. To make a long story short some prominent Muslims, Talhah,
al-Zubayr, and Aisha, Muhammad’s child bride, started the first civil
war in Islam. Ali and his army marched against them and they fought.
This battle is known as “The Battle of the Camel.” Ali was triumphant.
Talhah and al-Zubayr were killed and Aisha put under house arrest.
Casualty figures range from ten to twenty thousand killed.
I could give many more examples of Muhammad’s
“Companions” murdering other “Companions” for power or greed. Perhaps
its apex is the battle of Siffin, or perhaps its apex is when Yazid, a
Muslim leader in Damascus and the grandson of Muhammad’s arch-enemy Abu
Sufyan, killed Muhammad’s grandson, Husain. Husain’s head was brought
to Yazid and he and his companions desecrated it.
If you want to read about the events following Muhammad death you can read this series of articles: Islam's Royal Family, Part 1, Muhammad's Wealth
Better yet get Tabari’s History and read it for
yourself. Don’t let anyone do your thinking for you. Read and study
the Islamic source materials for yourself. Start with volume 10: “The History of al-Tabari Vol. 10: The Conquest of Arabia: The Riddah Wars A.D. 632-633/A.H. 11”
CONCLUSION
This was a brief, general comparison of two
kingdoms: Christ’s versus Muhammad’s. I wanted to present just how
different these men, their methods, and their fruits are.
Jesus’s rule is an internal presence that changes
men’s hearts for the better. Jesus’s kingdom is established spiritually
by persuasion and conviction. Clearly Christ’s rule transformed men’s
hearts and its evidence is found in the lives of the early Christians
who won over much of the Roman Empire without the sword but by their
faith and love. It continues today in the church and in the lives of
dedicated Christians. The evidence of that kingdom-rule is disciples
having “love for one another." Without that love, as demonstrated by
those foolish monks, the kingdom of God is absent. Its strength and
presence has varied over time but it has been present since His time on
earth.
Muhammad’s rule is an external force that changes
men’s outward lives but does not have the power to transform men’s
hearts towards godliness. Once Muhammad’s personal rule was removed by
his death, his companions, Islam’s leaders, proved themselves to be
unchanged, carnal, and sinful. The early Muslims hearts were selfish,
bitter, and cruel. Their lusts and desires drove them to betray and
murder their friends.
Muhammad’s kingdom was established and maintained
physically primarily by the sword. It is both a religious and
geo-political kingdom. It institutionalizes armies, taxes, familial and
cultural rules, commercial laws, etc. It has all the constructs of a
governed community and his kingdom continues today in one degree or
another in both Muslim’s lives and various Muslim-majority countries.
Muhammad was ordered by Allah to fight men to bend
the knee to his Islam. This included defense against enemy attacks and
offensive actions against enemies in order to force them to submit to
Muhammad’s rule. Muhammad’s message was clear: “Accept Islam and you
will be safe.” Further, Muhammad’s kingdom was maintained by force of
arms. When various Arab tribes left Islam, for various reasons, they
were attacked and forced to re-submit to Islam or die fighting. Like
spilled blood on a white sheet Muhammad’s kingdom spread throughout the
world. During the first 100 years of Islam Muhammad’s kingdom spread
and grew into one of the world’s largest empires primarily through the
force of arms.
I end with three quotes from Islamic sources. The
first quote concerns Iraqi Christians, who were once Christian,
converted to Islam, but then left Islam to follow Christ again. Their
words sum up my argument perfectly:
Among
them were many Christians who had accepted Islam, but when dissension
had developed in Islam had said, “By God, our religion from which we
have departed is better and more correct than that which these people
follow. Their religion does not stop them from shedding blood,
terrifying the roads, and seizing properties.” And they returned to
their former religion. Al-Khirrit met them and said to them, “Woe unto
you! Do you know the precept of Ali regarding any Christian who accepts
Islam and then reverts to Christianity? By God he will not hear
anything they say, he will not consider any excuse, he will not accept
any repentance, and he will not summon them to it. His precept
regarding them is immediate cutting off of the head when he gets hold of
them.”7
This second quote concerns what some of Muhammad’s Companions did to an 80 year old women whose tribe had fought the Muslims:
The Muslims were initially defeated by the Fazara.
The wounded Muslim leader swore vengeance. After he recovered he went
out and attacked the Fazara again. One very old woman was captured. Here
is the account:
"....and Umm
Qirfa Fatima was taken prisoner. She was a very old woman, wife of
Malik. Her daughter and Abdullah Masada were also taken. Zayd ordered
Qays to kill Umm Qirfa and he killed her cruelly (Tabari, by putting a
rope to her two legs and to two camels and driving them until they rent
her in two.)8
This third quote shows just how Muhammad regarded those who mock him (bear this in mind when you consider the Charlie Hebdo massacre). This involves a Muslim man who murdered his own slave because she mocked Muhammad.
Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas:
A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet was informed about it.
A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet was informed about it.
He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah
the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him
that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and
trembling the man stood up.
He sat before the Prophet and said: Apostle of
Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I
forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not
abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my
companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a
dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.
Thereupon the Prophet said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.9
In all three instances above we see the murder, the brutality, the cruelty, that was part of Muhammad’s Islam. If it was good enough for Muhammad then it’s good enough for the Muslims today.
Part of this article’s title is “Is ISIS Islamic?”
In order to arrive at a logical, conclusive answer we need to establish
what constitutes “Islamic” to establish a point of reference. We need
only examine Muhammad’s words and deeds to define “Islamic” and I’ve
shown that Muhammad’s Islam, real Islam, is evil, sinful, and inhumane.
I also wanted to contrast Jesus and Muhammad. Far too often ignorant
people conflate the two and equate them because both were great
religious leaders. These two men were diametrically opposed in both
their teachings and actions.
Continue with Part 2: Muhammad Did It, ISIS Does It
REFERENCES
1 Ibn Ishaq, "Sirat Rasulallah", compiled by A. Guillaume as "The Life of Muhammad", Oxford, London, 1955, page 212
2 Muslim, Abu’l-Husain, “Sahih Muslim”,
International Islamic Publishing House, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 1971,
translated by A. Siddiqi, volume 1, #33
3 al-Tabari, "The History of al-Tabari", State University of New York Press,” volume 7, page 29
4 al-Tabari, "The History of al-Tabari", State University of New York Press” volume 10, page 2
5 For a description of this event see: al-Tabari,
"The History of al-Tabari", State University of New York Press volume 9,
1993, pages 196, 197
6 al-Tabari, "The History of al-Tabari", State University of New York Press,” volume 15, pages 190, 191
7 al-Tabari, "The History of al-Tabari", State University of New York Press, volume 17, pages 187, 188
8 Ibn Ishaq, "Sirat Rasulallah", compiled by A. Guillaume as "The Life of Muhammad", Oxford, London, 1955 page 665
9 Abu Dawud, Suliman, “Sunan”, al-Madina, New Delhi, 1985, translated by A. Hasan, Book 38, Number 4348
[First published: 19 January 2015]
[Last updated: 20 October 2015]
Articles by Silas
Answering Islam Home Page
0 comments :